| Popis: |
Address correspondence to Louis M. Guenin, Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Harvard Medical School, 200 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115 (e-mail: guenin@hms.harvard.edu). As natural phenomena are to the scientist, so are arguments to the philosopher. The philosopher Richard Hare once said, “I like to give arguments for my position. They come in handy when people don’t agree with me.” Consider then the inclination of many among us—perhaps by virtue of being busy, or for other reasons—to pronounce a verdict, when a moral controversy comes along, by consulting aphorisms or slogans. By following this inclination, earnest people may unwittingly betray the moral views that they aspire to uphold. For they may fail to take account of the depth and subtlety of their respective moral views. I should like to discuss arguments offered in support of using human embryos in research and therapy. I plan to survey both arguments that work and arguments that do not. I shall first review six arguments that I place in the latter category. Each of these purports to justify research that I happen to support. But inasmuch as a good case is not made better by overstatement, and no case is made by an unsound argument, I am going to disavow those six arguments. I urge other supporters of donated embryo use to disavow them as well, because, as Bernard Williams once said, openness to criticism is the homage that candor pays to truth. To support my own view, I shall go on to sketch arguments that, so I shall suggest, are sound. I shall then say a bit more about cloning in particular, and shall close by remarking on the risk of abuses. |
